Epstein Secrets

mine how this case will proceed. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida this 28ih day of October, 2010. /ern KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge Copies to: Counsel of record EFTA00724495

OUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. 08-80736-OV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOES #1 and #2, Petitioners, vs.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, action. this 8ih day of October, 2010. Copies to: Counsel of record en KENNETH A. MARRA United States District Judge 2 EFTA00724484 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 41 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/27/2010 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DIST

y of attorneys. The Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court-imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey v. AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.I986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to mee

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 v. UNITED STATES

y of attorneys. The Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court- imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey'. AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to meet

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 UNITED STATES JANE

y of attorneys. The Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court- imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey" AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to meet

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 UNITED STATES JANE

e Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court- 4 EFTA00206808 imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey" AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to meet

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 v. UNITED STATES

e Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court- 4 EFTA00206867 imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey" AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to meet

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 v. UNITED STATES

y of attorneys. The Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court-imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey v. AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to me

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 1. UNITED STATES

y of attorneys. The Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court-imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey. AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to meet

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 1. UNITED STATES

y of attorneys. The Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court-imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey. AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.1986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to meet

UTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 08-80736-Civ-Marra/Johnson JANE DOES #1 and #2 v. UNITED STATES

y of attorneys. The Eleventh Circuit has held that simple negligence in meeting a court-imposed deadline is not sufficient to warrant dismissal. See McKelvey v. AT & T Techs., Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11th Cir.I986) (per curiam). Here, there is not even negligence, as the victims have not failed to mee